Skip to main content

About your Search

Search Results 0 to 5 of about 6
mcconnell said. "higher medicare premiums for the wealthy, an increase in the medicare eligibility age, and a slowing of costs of living increases for programs like social security. and then republicans would agree to include more tax revenue in the deal but not from higher tax rates." now, let's just look at this for a second. we'll go to you first, nan. he wants medicare eligibility, he wants medicaid reforms, he wants spending cuts. then he'll talk revenues. that seems reasonable to me. is he going to do it? will the republicans come back with their own counter offer? >> well, certainly larry those are elements of a long-term approach to our enormous debt. it's a crushing debt. it hams our vulnerability across the world. i think we should look very seriously yet again and the speaker's mentioned it at the 2010 health law, affordable care act. that is a massive cost weight on the american people. it is a deeply unpopular issue. still it was relatively ignored during the election but it's still an active issue. and we have to provide assurance. americans have told us. they told us
, stimulus tax extenders, the medicare patch, the mortgage plan they are is going to give mortgage credit. a lot of spending increases. you know, boehner is, i think you got to give him an a for being a valiant guy. he's down to 1.75 to 1 on spending cuts to revenues. now they originally wanted to start out with about three. the president's plan is zero spending cuts. i'm just saying boehner is down to 1.75 to one. that could be a problem, jimmy. >> we have the 800 billion which i read it and bloomberg is reporting the same thing, 800 billion is 800 billion before of what was based on economic growth, bring in more revenue. this $800 billion is done on a static basis, purely by getting rid of deductions. they are unnamed. this is a huge concession on the part of the house republicans and you're right. a balanced plan according to economists is one that's heavy on the spending cuts, light on the tax increases. that's what the house republicans have give end. still too heavy on the tax increases as opposed to the president's plan which was widely heavy on the tax hikes but harley any spendi
and -- and the medicare, you're talking a 45% top rate. >> and they want to cap some deductions on top of that. matt miller, you came from a fiscally conservative administration. >> that takes you to an effective rate in the low 42s. >> can i say calm down. it's an offer. >> you worked for alice arriven, and the clinton administration did a very good job -- that's me talking -- a very good job on this. matt, you know darn well this offer here is not serious by the democrats. >> i disagree, i'll tell you why. restores the clinton eera rates is not some catastrophe. it's a fair concern on the medicare thing. >> also doubling down when you include the deductibility. why not go to where the speaker was? he said he was for revenue. why not take the speaker up on that? >> paul ryan's offer. this on one i'm. paul ryan's budget, passed by all the republicans, incurred trillions in debt because he kept taxes, he assumed it would stay at 19% of gdp and did nothing on the tax side at all. he was considered an intellectual hero. that's a joke. you know, this is the other side of the same thing. >> paul ryan is
to medicare crieders. you actually do need to take on and storm reforming or we're going to be facing a down grade of all three rate being agencies. >> in brief, this stuff about -- they call it providers. providers are patients, providers congress -- you think congratulations and republican are going to take out from -- >> i think it's going to be a provider but i generally don't think it's like it. >> how can john boehner and the republican, preserving some modicum of preegt market, limited government that lacks even small entertainment cuts and plaques spending cut. the see kwenter, that's gone, right? what is going nobody its place. >> supposedly. >> and mr. bainor has made it very clor that it sounded to me like mr. john boehner despites a's in they were to find ways to get to that number. the problem is as long as the pie stays the size that it, is you're not talking about significant changes that are going to have maybe ten-year changes long time for this kmirnt economy, when you begin to what the impact of this is 20, 30, 45 years a road. you're talking about the. >> my fear is that
for their medicare? it meets the president's animus that we must get more money out of the rich. let's just send less money to the rich. i'm also willing to compromise on military spending. the only thing i'm not willing to compromise is to throw out facts, throw out common sense and say, oh, let's take more money out of the private sector and maybe the economy will do better. it is a really, really bad idea to raise taxes. i think he'll perhaps send us into another recession. >> you may be right, as a reagan supply sider, my heart and head are with you on this. but it doesn't seem you can get a deal that would avoid a big tax hike unless you get whatever cuts you can get plus a revenue increase. what do you think of mr. boehner's idea, cap deductions and get $800 million in revenues? does that make any sense. >> that's a tax increase. it's a bad idea. but i have yet another thought how we could fix this. why don't we let the democrats pass whatever they want. if they are the party of higher taxes, all the republicans in the house vote present and let the democrats raise taxes as high as they want to
to truly save medicare and social security, we've got to do something about it. that's what republicans have been proposing all along. we want to solve a problem once and for all. and that's why we haven't waited -- it's interesting that we're just now talking about it. but back in july, we passed legislation that would freeze the rates, deal with sequestration, make the cuts that needed to take place in spend sog we wouldn't be at this dilemma in december at this time. the president was on the campaign trail then. we thought he'd get off the campaign trail now and stop politics and start focusing on policy. >> can i ask you one last one quickly. the original across the board spending cut for sequestration was i believe $1.2 trillion. >> yes. >> in the republican proposal, you all seemed to have $200 billion as some kind of substitute. what's going to happen to the other trillion dollars in spending cuts that people expected? >> well, we believe you take care of it right now for a couple years. we're looking to not just solve this problem overall. we want to have overall tax reform next
Search Results 0 to 5 of about 6